At last week’s Future Tasmania 2023 event in Hobart, Bernard Salt, self-proclaimed as Australia’s leading demographer, made a number of blatantly incorrect and misleading statements about Tasmania’s population growth since 2016 which warrant correction.

In the lead up to the event Salt stated in an Opinion Piece that

• The pandemic triggered the homecoming of 27,000 expat Tasmanians, lifting the state’s population by 5 per cent in one fell swoop.
• These home-comers aren’t 20-something backpackers cutting short a grand tour of Europe; they’re 30-something and 40-something skilled workers with work history, contacts and, presumably, some level of capital.
• My argument is that Tasmania’s demographic turnaround, [is a] pandemic injection of skills, youth and energy.
• Tasmania’s demographic outflow has flipped and is now heading straight for us in the form of an inflow. 

While I don’t like to ruin a good story with fact, I argue that decision-making – in terms of policy and investment – should be informed by a robust, reliable and truthful discussion about population change in Tasmania.

Here’s the reality check.

After every Census of Population and Housing, the ABS ‘rebases’ the population. Rebasing is the process of updating population estimates for the five years between Censuses, to incorporate information from the most recent Census. This is because the Census provides an actual count of Australia’s population whereas the ERP between Censuses is estimated based on administrative data – birth registration, death certificates, change of address data with Medicare and overseas arrivals and departures. Following each Census, revisions are made to the estimates for each quarterly and annual period in the previous intercensal period, this is referred to as ‘rebasing’.

The ERP includes all people who usually live in Australia (regardless of nationality, citizenship or visa status).
During this rebasing process for Tasmania the ABS discovered an undercount; Tasmania’s ERP was around 26,500 larger in size than had been estimated since the 2016 Census – equivalent to 4.9% larger. Tasmania’s population actually grew by around 9.7% rather than the 4.3% the pre-rebased ERP suggested.

Most of this undercount are not expats nor home-comers returning to Tasmania during the pandemic, but explained by overseas-born, young working age people who are likely to be on temporary visas and therefore not captured in internal migration movements. This is because they do not have access to Medicare – the primary data source for internal migration movements.

Also, most of Tasmania’s population growth since 2016 occurred prior to the pandemic. Overall, it grew by around 47,000 people - the sum of births, less deaths, plus interstate arrivals, less interstate departures, plus overseas arrivals, less overseas departures.

Of Tasmania’s total population growth since 2016, 89% of it occurred prior to March 2020. Since the onset of the pandemic, population growth has been 10,044 in total, averaging an annual rate of 1.0% ranging from 2.03% in June 2020 to 0.58% in September 2021.

Of those residing in Tasmania at the time of the 2021 Census and who lived overseas five years prior (approx. 19,300 people), 82% were not Australian citizens, and of those 77% were aged between 20 and 39 years). Additionally, approximately 33,300 Australians and 11,000 non-citizens moved to Tasmania from interstate during the same period. Around 29,000 people lived in Tasmania five years prior to the 2021 Census and now live interstate. Of these, 90% are Australian citizens, and 10% are non-citizens, the majority in the younger, working age groups. The Census does not capture those people who used to live in Tasmania and now live overseas.  

During the onset of the pandemic there was an initial increase of Tasmanians returning from overseas, to provide a net gain of 710 people in 2019/20, this reduced to a net gain of 70 in 2020/21 and a net loss of 70 in 2021/22.
Most of the overseas migration gain since March 2020 has been from seasonal workers from the pacific islands who were unable to return home during the pandemic. However, international students on temporary visas are now increasing again.

In terms of interstate migration, since the pandemic began in March 2020, 4 out of 6 quarters have recorded net interstate migration loss, including the last two to September 2022.

Population change in Tasmania now appears to be resembling pre-2016 patterns – smaller gains in natural increase (more births than deaths), net gains from overseas migration, and net losses from interstate migration.

So, while Bernard Salt may be an entertaining social commentator, the blatant inaccuracies in his claims about Tasmania’s population change highlight the need for a State Demographer and the need for fact over fiction in informing our decision-making.
​
Given the tumultuous years that we have experienced since March 2020, it is important that population change is closely monitored and that robust population projections are invested in. This will ensure that the needs of Tasmanians can be planned for, and met, into the future.
 
Dr Lisa Denny is a Workforce Demographer, Adjunct Associate Professor with the Institute for Social Change at the University of Tasmania and a member of the Expert Panel for the Centre of Population, Australian Treasury. 

The ABS recently released the preliminary re-based Estimate Resident Population (ERP) data for regions by age and sex. This blog provides a quick snapshot of the findings for Tasmania at the Local Government Area (LGA) level. 

At a State level, the ABS considerably under-estimated the size and growth rate of Tasmania’s Estimated Resident Population (ERP) between the 2016 Census and the 2021 Census so that the rebased population is almost 30,000 larger than estimated. Over the five year period, the population grew 9.7% rather than the 4.3% the pre-rebased ERP suggested.

However, for the year to 2021, the growth rate declined to 0.8%. The slower growth can be attributable to policy measures associated with the Government's response to the COVID-19 global pandemic, however, growth had slowed prior to the onset of the pandemic. This reduced the average growth rate since 2016 to 1.5% per annum.
​
Compared with the ABS population projections from 2013 and 2018, the Tasmanian population is growing at a much faster rate than either of the high series (Series A) projected

There is also considerable divergence between the old ERP and the rebased ERP for all Local Government Areas in Tasmania.

The ABS under-estimated the annual growth rates for all LGAs by an average of 0.7 percentage points per annum. 

Smaller coastal or lifestyle LGAs and periphery LGAs recorded higher average growth rates than the more populated LGAs, however, remote and small LGAs recorded slower growth rates.
​
-  4 LGAs recorded population decline in the year to 2021 (Flinders Island, George Town, Hobart and King Island)
- 1 LGA recorded population decline since 2016 (Flinders Island)

Given the level of interest and the response I have received to the Talking Point I wrote for the Mercury on 8 August 2022 in relation to Tasmania’s population strategy, I have put together a brief addendum to provide a more technical explanation and visual representation of the change in Tasmania’s population age structure since the last ABS Census of Population and Housing (not possible in the printed form of a newspaper).

After each Census the ABS ‘rebases’ the Estimated Resident Population (ERP) for Australia and its regions and other statistical areas. This is because the Census provides an actual count of Australia’s population whereas ERP between Censuses is estimated based on the collection of administrative data – births, deaths and migration (I explain the implications of using administrative data for interstate migration in this blog). Each quarter these estimates are added to the previous population stock estimate.  The ERP includes all people who usually live in Australia (regardless of nationality, citizenship or visa status).

The ABS has released the preliminary rebased ERP for June 2021 with the final rebased ERP due to be released in June 2023. Read more about the rebasing process here.

The rebasing of Tasmania’s ERP has revealed a dramatic change in the population age structure in a very short period of time – from 2016 to 2021 - which is difficult to reconcile at the moment.  Further analysis of ABS Census migration data (place usual of residence – PUR) one year prior and five years prior to the Census) should provide greater insight when the data becomes available from October this year.

The first figure below shows Tasmania’s population age structure in 2016 (orange) and the second shows the rebased population age structure for 2021 (blue). As is visually evident, they are very different population age structures.
​
In 2016, Tasmania’s population age structure represented a rapidly ageing population, with the large baby boomer cohort progressively getting older, the working age population diminishing in size reflecting the age profile of interstate migration movements, and a smaller cohort of children reflecting both the decline in the size of the reproductive cohort (women aged 15 to 49 technically) and the lower than replacement rate TFR (total fertility rate).

​By 2021, a bulge has appeared in the 25-to-39-year age groups. From the perspective of sustaining the population, this is a welcome change contributing to the prime working age groups and also reproducing age groups. However, the extent of the rebased change is somewhat unexplained (as yet). We know that there had been a reversal in the historic interest migration trends for these age groups for the few years prior to 2019, as I discuss in this blog and this one, however, these interstate migration changes should have been captured in the quarterly ERP releases. These blogs also highlight the decline in arrivals to Tasmania and increase in departures from Tasmania which started occurring prior to the pandemic. Therefore, it is hard to reconcile the changes in the rebased age structure based on interstate migration movements. Overseas migration to Tasmania was previously dominated by international students, and while smaller in number than total interstate migration movements, they would certainly make a considerable contribution to the bulge (if they had stayed in Tasmania during the pandemic). All of these are factors we will be able to explore further once the 2021 Census data is released (and in a format we can analysis it in!). 

The below chart shows the percentage change in the size of the age cohort between 2016 and 2021 (orange columns) and the grey column shows the proportion of the total population change (50,400 additional people) attributable to the respective age group.

As is evident, the size of the 25- to 39-year-old age groups increased significantly in the five-year period (over 30% for those aged 29 to 29) which can not be explained by the size of the age group in the previous five-year period and can only be explained by migration – interstate and overseas. The size of the 70- to 84-year-old age groups also increased considerably which can be explained by a number of factors; the size of the age group in the previous five-year period, increased longevity and migration. The increase in the 25- to 39-year-old age group represented a greater proportion of overall population change than the 70-to-84-year age group with almost 1 in 5 of the additional Tasmania being aged between 25 and 29 years (all of whom need somewhere to live).
​
At the other end of the spectrum, there are now less people in Tasmania aged between 0 and 9, 15 to 19 and 40 to 49 years of age than in 2016.

These changes in Tasmania’s population age structure have implications for our infrastructure and services needs which need to be planned for, in particular – health, education and housing, notwithstanding the regional differences in population change not discussed here.

NB. Important to note that the ABS has released preliminary rebased ERP data only, the final rebased ERP will be released in June 2023.

Like many regions in the developed world experiencing population ageing, the Tasmanian Government’s mitigation strategy has been to focus on population growth, and the assumed economic benefits associated with population growth, to address the perceived fiscal challenges presented by an ageing population.

Tasmania’s Population Growth Strategy: 650,000 people by 2050, launched in 2015 (disclosure: I provided advice to the Tasmanian Government at the time), includes three key pillars, made up of 52 initiatives; i) job creation and workforce development, (ii) migration and (iii) liveability, with the overall aim to attract people to move to Tasmania and retain Tasmanians in the state. Despite the three pillars, much of the proactive effort has been on migration and promoting the state’s lifestyle as the best place to live and work and raise a family.

It could be said that this approach successfully achieved the intended outcomes.

Until 2018, Tasmania’s population grew at its highest rates this Century, driven by both interstate and overseas migration, accounting for around 80 per cent of the growth. However, growth started to slow in 2019 as arrivals to the state began to decline and departures from the state increased, largely explained by our relative housing affordability (or lack thereof).

Since the start of the COVID-19 global pandemic in the first quarter of 2020, discussion and debate about the potential impact on migration patterns and long-term trends in Australia has been prominent, particularly in relation to lifestyle and where people want to live.

Given that Tasmania’s population growth since the pandemic has been driven by natural increase (more births than deaths), overseas migration for Australia continues to be negative and that the true volume of interstate migration is skewed by the impact of the mass vaccination roll out, the 2015 Tasmanian Population Growth Strategy is now obsolete as it stands and a comprehensive review is warranted.

While previous marketing endeavours to grow the population through migration were successful, they also came at a cost. Research out of the Australian Government's Centre for Population finds that "Relative property prices in states and territories appear to have a greater influence than relative unemployment rates on interstate migration. A five per cent increase in property prices will increase the number of people migrating out of that state by 1.0 per cent."

​When Tasmania’s relatively housing affordability began to decline in 2018, so too did net migration for the state, because the Government failed to plan for that growth.

The Tasmanian Government also failed to target the migrants it needs most. Touting our enviable lifestyle may attract the low hanging fruit but it also has the potential to increase the demands on already stretched public services and infrastructure. Without a corresponding increase in the provision of these services and infrastructure, the liveability of Tasmania – our competitive edge - is harmed, not just for attracting migrants, but for retaining Tasmanians.

While the Centre for Population reports that the top reported drivers behind interstate migration in Australia are family reasons (35 per cent) followed closely by employment reasons (30 per cent), research also shows that the decision to move interstate or overseas is a personal one influenced by a multitude, and conflation, of other factors such as partner’s jobs, housing, schooling and lifestyle to name a few. However, those seeking lifestyle advantages tend to relocate to regions within their own state. Previous research has also shown that the Tasmanian diaspora will only return to the state if the provision of health and education services meet their expectations, and that wage parity is within acceptable levels.

Given that the Tasmanian Population Growth Strategy has not been reviewed since 2018 (according to the Department of State Growth website) and the critical shortage of a range of qualified and experienced workers impacting the provision of key public services and infrastructure, which in turn impacts the potential for population growth, a comprehensive review of the Population Strategy needs to be undertaken.

Tasmania has established itself as an enviable place to live for many as it has a strong brand, and great potential.

However, a strategy around ‘growth’ needs to be inclusive and needs to move beyond marketing that lifestyle and the risks it presents. The strategy needs to move to the next level and prioritise its efforts to attract and retain those people we *need* in the state, for Tasmania and Tasmanians. To do that, it may need to strategically target people who may not have previously considered Tasmania as a place to live and work and raise a family. And to do that, it will need a much greater understanding of the theories of migration and the anthropological differences in what constitutes a good life, success and happiness.
 
Dr Lisa Denny
Workforce Demographer, Adjunct Associate Professor, Institute for Social Change, University of Tasmania www.lisadenny.com.au


This article was published as a Talking Point in the Mercury on Monday, 8th of August, 2022. 

Since the start of the COVID-19 global pandemic from around March 2020 there has been much discussion and debate about the potential impact on migration patterns and long-term trends in Australia, particularly in relation to lifestyle and where people want to live.

More recently, with the release of the first tranche of the ABS 2021 Census of Population and Housing data and the National, state and territory population data on the same day (28 June 2022), this discussion has focussed on the large volume of interstate migration movements within Australia, without consideration of the context in which these movements occurred nor the policy positions that existed at the time.  

As we all know, since March 2020, Australia, and its states and territories, have experienced COVID outbreaks, lock downs and border controls at various times and for various lengths of time. These events have prevented ease of mobility within and between states to varying degrees. In addition to these restrictions, the national and state policy positions at the time included vaccinations against COVID-19, firstly with older ages and vulnerable cohorts followed by other age group categories and also then in response to mass outbreaks, particularly in NSW and Victoria. Each state and territory had different rates of take up, reflecting their socio-demographic profiles. In Tasmania's case, as an older, more vulnerable and smaller state with an engaged and proactive Premier at the time, the take up was relatively strong. Nation leading even. Policy positions further evolved to require proof of vaccination to enter public buildings, spaces and other enterprises. As a public health initiative, vaccinations were recorded through the Medicare system and providing proof of vaccination required a digital certificate to be downloaded from the Medicare portal. 

Now, you may be wondering how all this impacts interstate migration movements. Interstate migration movements can not be measured directly, so the ABS uses administrative data to estimate interstate migration movements. The primary source of administrative data the ABS uses is Medicare change of address data (as well as ABS Census usual address one year ago data).

The mass COVID-19 vaccination roll out resulted in a significant increase in the number of Australians changing their address with Medicare at different times, in different states and territories, throughout the period of policy changes. The ABS therefore advises that the large number of address changes that were recorded in each quarter, may not have actually occurred in the respective quarter.

This is evident for Tasmania in the below figure. A steep increase in both interstate arrivals and departures is evident between 2020 and 2021. While arrivals to the state had started declining since 2018, and departures from Tasmania had been increasing steadily since 2015, the rate of change in both arrivals and departures is consistent with the period of mass vaccination roll out. However, given that the decision to move interstate is a personal one, it is likely that other factors also contribute to the decision; family, jobs, housing and lifestyle to name a few. 

The extreme increase in the volume of interstate migration movements is evident when compared with a rolling average of quarterly movements which attempts to smooth out the variability between quarters.

In the figures below, the number of people arriving in Tasmania from interstate began to almost exponentially increase from the September 2020 quarter and continued to the latest available data in December 2021 quarter, levels never before seen. 

For departures from Tasmania, a similar exponential increase occurred, however, a quarter later than the change for arrivals and for a shorter period, with the rate of departures from the state now appearing to be slowing. This likely reflects the difference in vaccination rates by state and also by age group, given more younger people tend to leave Tasmania to Victoria and NSW which had a period of intense vaccination roll out during their outbreaks from July 2021 to October 2021. Additionally, young people were not a priority age group for early vaccination. 

When considered by age group, the significant change in interstate migration arrivals and departures will have a long term impact on Tasmania's population profile. As is evident from the figures below, the 2021 (the red column) recorded a significant increase in the number of people moving to Tasmania aged 30 to 64 years of age when compared with the average since 2014 (the previous sustained period of growth). 

For departures from Tasmania during 2021 (the red column below), the numbers were extreme for those aged 25 to 39 when compared with the average since 2014. The volume of departures from the state was also considerably higher than the average for all age groups older than 40 years of age. 

When the sum of interstate migration arrivals and departures (net interstate migration) is considered, it provides an insight into the longer term impact the pandemic will have on Tasmania's population age structure. 

Tasmania recorded a significant net loss of 20 to 34 year olds during 2021. For all other years since 2017 and the average since 2014, Tasmania had recorded a net gain for the 25 to 34 year ago groups which was reversed in 2021.While Tasmania has historically always recorded a net loss of 20 to 24 year olds, it was considerably more in 2021 compared with previous years.  

The net gain for age groups 40 to 69 was higher than average, particularly so for those aged 55 to 59 and 50 to 54 years of age. 

The longer term impact on Tasmania's population will be a larger bite in our age structure with a reduction in both the size and proportion of prime working age and reproductive age people, resulting in more rapid population ageing.

It is important to note that when considering these dramatic changes, the available data may reflect a (one-off?) correction of historical interstate migration movements. Young adults in particular, may not change their Medicare records when they relocate as they have less need for health services than other age groups. Whether or not they continue to remains to be seen. It would be unwise to suggest that new trends are evolving as a result of the pandemic, just yet anyway. What the pandemic has exposed is the reliance on administrative data to track migration movements as well as the reliance on personal responsibility to changing Medicare records by those who relocate. However, it may also result in adults being more proactive in monitoring their health and their records into the future.

​The data available lags real time by at least six months and, given we are still living in the pandemic with the impact of COVID-19 still affecting our everyday lives, the economy and society, it is unlikely that any new trends, opposed to short term patterns, will be evident for a number of years. While short term patterns are certainly evident, interstate migration movements will continue to fluctuate relative to other states and territories, as they did prior to the pandemic, and as we find our new normal into the future. 

How long will the upheaval last?

Industrial revolution scholars suggest it will take as long as it takes to reset the socio-political paradigm.

Historically, this transition has been long and difficult – two to three decades – and accompanied by considerable social costs.

Below are extracts from my 2019 (i.e. pre-pandemic) paper, published in the Australian Journal of Labour Economics. While the paper focussed on the future of work in Australia and how the nation was transitioning through what is referred to as the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the process of this transition is relevant in today’s world, perhaps even more so.  
-
Current public discourse regarding the future of work and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) invites anxiety (Morgan 2019), implies determinism (Nübler 2016) and fails to acknowledge the socio-political role required in shaping the future of work (Perez 2012b).

Like history, the process of an industrial revolution repeats itself; a long wave transformation which plays out over half a century, give or take a decade (Atkinson 2018; Perez 2004, 2010, 2012b; Soete 2018). The historical cycle of an industrial revolution is a three-phase process involving job destruction (Phase 1) and job creation (Phase 3) with a turning point, or adjustment phase, sandwiched between the two (Perez 2010). 

Between these two phases sits an adjustment period which is accompanied by resistance to change, inertia, social dishevel, rising inequality, regional disparities and economic stagnation, eventually becoming a critical issue which requires socio-political intervention. Perez and others (listed above) argue that the adjustment period is not a passive process and cannot be left to the markets to determine. The period of this interval lasts as long as it takes to establish the institutional framework required to fully capture the potential of the new techno-economic realm; it needs to be shaped by government regulation and policies. The level of political consensus, conflict or confusion strongly influences the speed and the ease or difficulty with which the surge of development and growth is established. Given that changes in an economy usually happen at a much faster pace than institutional reform, according to Perez these adjustment phases have historically been long and difficult – two to three decades – and accompanied by considerable social costs.

The institutional framework which governs the rules and regulations of both the economy and society, forms a critical component of the process to job creation during an industrial revolution. Nübler (2016) argues that institutions are integral in the pace of change, driving the adjustment phase and mobilising support for change whereby the institutional framework generates a sense of justice in society, that the distribution of gains and losses; the unintended consequences of technological advancements associated with the revolution, are considered fair.

Morgan (2019) extends the understanding of the revolutionary process, stating that the diffusion of new technology is subject to the values, principles and mechanisms of society so much so that the extent of diffusion is subject to the response by institutions, rules, laws, behavioural responses, rights and obligations associated with new technology and how society uses it, or rejects it.

This includes maintaining trust in the institutional framework. Trust that institutions will respond accordingly in times of systemic failings provides people and society with the confidence and security they need to continue on with their lives, highlighting the importance of institutions being adaptable and flexible to achieve long-term advances in prosperity.

Perez (2004) sums up the challenges of the adjustment phase as a process whereby the existing institutional framework becomes obsolete as it was designed around a previous techno-economic paradigm, arguing that the persistent application of obsolete practices can actually aggravate society and the economy contributing to a collapse, often in the form of a recession or financial market failure.

Given the long wave creative destruction process (Schumpeter 1942) to widespread prosperity of an industrial revolution, Hofheinz (2018) suggests that the pressing issue now is how do nations prepare for and legislate for an economy where society faces a different set of challenges, problems that will need to be mitigated with a different set of policies, proclaiming “We stand on the cusp of an important decision: will we find and develop the social innovation needed to make the digital revolution a win-win for all?”

The ability of a country to transition its economy from job destruction to job creation requires extension beyond relying on market forces to encompassing socio-political intervention.  This potential socio-economic transformation is dependent upon a country’s productive and social endowments whereby productive capacities are embodied in the physical sphere of production factors and infrastructure and the social capabilities are embodied in the intangible sphere; the educational attainment structure (EAS), the collective knowledge base of a society and its institutional framework (Nübler 2014a, 2014b, 2016).

In order to transition to the third phase of industrial revolution to achieve longer term growth and social prosperity, Australia needs socio-political intervention to address four issues:

1. The transformation of the institutional framework to facilitate both economic and social prosperity through increasing trust and safe-guarding;
2. The repositioning of education, skill and training policy to shift its educational attainment structure to one of ‘strong middle’ and enhancing collective learning and the knowledge structure;
3. The prioritisation of gender equality in rethinking both the structure of employment and the forms of work for both men and women; and
4. Redesigning economic development policy to embrace contemporary manufacturing as a growing, important industry.

​Perez likens the current global economic and social challenges to the period prior to the Great Depression of the 1930s and resistance to then US President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal for prolonged economic stagnation (Perez 2012a). However, despite declaring that he may not succeed but that he would try and try again; “The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands, bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.”, through political leadership and government and industry collaboration, Roosevelt facilitated institutional reform that created the greatest ‘surge of development’ in history.  

-
 
The full paper is available here: http://ftprepec.drivehq.com/ozl/journl/downloads/AJLE222denny.pdf
 
 
 
 

​

ABS data released today contained the first full period of interstate migration data for arrivals and departures by age and sex since the start of the pandemic in March 2020.

The data for the financial year ending June 2021 reveals a dramatic change in the age profile of those moving to Tasmania and those leaving Tasmania compared with the pre-pandemic profile (the average for 2017 to 2019 financial year data).

If this interstate migration age profile continues, it is likely to have serious implications for economic production and demographic reproduction for Tasmania.

While a quick summary of the interstate migration data reveals that Tasmania recorded a small net loss of 110 people for FY2021 - contrary to popular belief - driven by a 5.9% decline in arrivals to the state and an 8.8% increase in departures from the state, the devil is in the detail.

The age profile of interstate migration for FY 2021 is not comparable to previous years going back to 1998. The most comparable age profile is for 2002, prior to the economic growth period of the early- to mid-2000s.  

For FY2021, Tasmania recorded a reversal of pre-pandemic trends with significant net interstate migration losses for those aged 20 to 34, and smaller, comparable losses for those aged 15 to 19. A net loss was also recorded for those aged 35 to 39 and 70 and older, and zero for those aged 5 to 9, whereas net gains had been recorded for these age groups prior to the pandemic.  
​
Net interstate migration gains were recorded for those aged 0 to 4 and 44 to 69, however at lower levels than prior to the pandemic, except for those aged 55 to 59 years which increased by 10%.

​These net figures can be better understood through analysis of interstate arrivals and departures.

Considerably higher numbers of Tasmanians aged 25 to 39 left the state during FY 2021, compared with the pre-pandemic average. A smaller increase in the number of Tasmanians aged 44 to 54 and those aged 70 or older was recorded.

​For arrivals, considerably fewer people moved to Tasmania in the age groups 0 to 29, compared with the pre-pandemic average. Smaller increases in arrivals were recorded for those aged 35 to 49, with larger increases for those aged 50 to 59 years. 

Compared with pre-pandemic levels, interstate departures increased substantially for all age groups 25 to 39, ranging from an increase of 43.1% for those aged 30 to 34 to 20.8% for those aged 25 to 29. A considerable percentage increase in departures was also recorded for those aged 70 or older, however in much smaller numbers. Other age groups recorded smaller declines or increases. 

Compared with pre-pandemic levels, interstate arrivals declined for all age groups 0 to 29, ranging from a decline of 28.3% for those aged 20 to 24 to 11% for those aged 15 to 19. Arrivals increased for all age groups aged 35 to 64, ranging from 18.7% for those aged 50 to 54 to 1.6% for those aged 45 to 49 years. 

These age profile movements will likely contribute to Tasmania’s rate of population ageing increasing considerably, particularly given that overseas migration – which historically placed downward pressure on our median age – has also reversed to negative net figures.

What the data does not tell us is why this occurred. Historically, the decision to relocate is made based on relative economic opportunities, housing affordability, and/or family reasons. Border closures may have also contributed to these changes during the FY 2021. Interestingly, research out of the Australian Government's Centre for Population finds that "Relative property prices in states and territories appear to have a greater influence than relative unemployment rates on interstate migration. A five per cent increase in property prices will increase the number of people migrating out of that state by 1.0 per cent."

While we continue to live during a period of a global pandemic, it is difficult to predict if this age profile pattern will continue. While this age profile data is for the FY2021 period only, interstate migration for the September 2021 quarter showed a further significant increase in net interstate migration loss, led by a 40% increase in interstate departures compared with the previous year. Interestingly, this occurred while both NSW and Victoria were in lockdown. Given this, further exploration of the reasons for Tasmanians leaving the state is warranted.

While a government spokesperson may suggest that this significant shift in the interstate migration age profile is the result of the pandemic and could not be foreseen, I suggest that this trend had begun prior to the pandemic and that it is the repercussion from failing to plan appropriately for the population growth that preceded the pandemic, but was potentially exacerbated by the pandemic. As such, the Tasmania Government’s Population Growth Strategy requires an urgent review. 

Today the ABS released population data for Australia, states and the territories relating to the September 2021 quarter.  
 
In this time of uncertainty, it is important that each quarterly release of population data is taken in context with what was happening in the country (and the rest of the world) during that time. There is little point looking at annual figures and trying to predict what may or may not happen into the future, as contrary to popular belief, we are still living during a global pandemic. The only thing constant at the moment is change.
 
Today's release relates to population change in the September quarter of 2021 - July, August and September. This is the period that NSW and Victoria were in lock down and the Delta strain of COVID-19 was taking hold. It was the time that the Premier made the comment "Tasmania is going to experience population growth well above the Treasury forecasts because interstate migrants are knocking on the door and knocking loudly. "
 
In one way he was right - people from interstate were knocking loudly on our door and more people arrived in Tasmania from interstate during the September 2021 quarter than ever before. But he was wrong in claiming that Tasmania is going to experience population growth well above the Treasury forecasts because he failed to consider that more people may also be leaving Tasmania to live interstate than ever before. And this is what  happened. Over 5200 people left Tasmania to live interstate during that quarter, the highest quarterly number of interstate departures on record, and nearly 1000 more than the previous highest number which was for the June 2021 quarter, also recorded during the pandemic. The fourth highest number of people leaving Tasmania was also during the pandemic in the December 2000 quarter. 
 
Both interstate and overseas migration recorded net losses during the September 2021 quarter. This means that Tasmania's population only grew due to natural increase - more births than deaths -  and that rate of growth is the lowest it has been this century.

I refer you back to my blog from December last year for explanation and commentary relating to the components of population change as it still applies. 
http://www.lisadenny.com.au/blog/the-borders-are-open-what-does-it-mean-for-tasmanias-population-growth

This submission to the Tasmanian Government's Literacy Advisory Panel’s Setting the Scene Community Consultation Paper relates specifically to the impact of learning disabilities on becoming literate. Learning disabilities are not identified, nor discussed, in the Setting the Scene paper.

The Tasmanian Government has a goal to achieve 100 percent literacy in the state, and within that aim, a target that all grade 7 students will start high school above the expected level of reading by no later than 2030. 

A number of Australian research studies indicate that between 10 to 16 per cent of students are perceived by their teachers to have learning difficulties that have support needs which extend beyond those normally addressed by classroom teachers under differentiated teaching practices.

Within the population of students with learning difficulties there is a smaller sub-set of students who show persistent and long-lasting learning impairments. These are identified as students with a learning disability. It is estimated that approximately 4 per cent of Australian students have a learning disability. In Tasmania, this is equivalent to around 4,360 students.

Students with a learning disability have a neurological disorder, rather than intellectual impairment, and present with varying degrees of unexpected under-achievement in one or more areas of literacy; reading, spelling or writing, and/or numeracy, 80 per cent of whom struggle with reading.

Each of these children have the right to receive the appropriate support and interventions to enable them to become literate adults and participate fully in our society and economy, as per the Tasmanian Government’s goal.

To achieve the Tasmanian Government’s aim that all grade 7 students start high school above the expected level of reading by no later than 2030, children with learning disabilities will need appropriate intervention and support at the intensity required.

This submission proposes a policy solution and capacity building program to support children with learning disabilities become literate as well as supporting the educators in the system and the Tasmanian Government achieve its target. 

The borders are open! And, according to the Premier, Tasmania is going to experience population growth well above the Treasury forecasts because interstate migrants are ‘knocking on the door and knocking loudly’.

However, contrary to popular belief, interstate migration to Tasmania is actually only one of six factors which influence population change and any potential growth. The other five are births, deaths, interstate migration from Tasmania to other parts of Australia, overseas migration to Tasmania and overseas migration from Tasmania to another country.

ABS population data released today reveals that Tasmania experienced population growth of 0.17% for the year to June 2021, compared with 1.12% for the previous 12 months, and considerably lower than that forecast by the Tasmanian Treasury (0.6%). This growth was almost entirely sourced from natural increase (more births than deaths). Net overseas migration was negative for the first time on record, offset slightly by a very small net interstate migration gain of 49 persons for the year. 

In terms of births, Tasmania’s total fertility rate (TFR - the number of children a woman is expected to have in her lifetime) is well below the population replacement rate (2.1) and had been declining steadily since around 2008, after a brief increase. The number of children born had also been declining steadily due to the proportion and number of women of reproductive age in Tasmania also declining. Even so, for 2020, Tasmania’s TFR remained relatively steady at 1.77 and higher than all other states. 2020 saw a slight increase (58) in the number of babies born, despite a slight decrease in the TFR, which is indicative of an increase in the number of women of reproductive ages in Tasmania - largely explained by a shift in the interstate migration profile of recent years. t
 
While many commentators predict a further decline in the number of births and the fertility rate following the pandemic, as has been the case in historical economic recessions, COVID-19 was a health crisis first, rather than an economic one. While birth data for pandemic-conceived babies will not be available until late 2022, early anecdotal evidence and analysis of obstetrics and Medicare data suggests that there may be a short term increase in births throughout 2021 and 2022. This will contribute to increasing the population and also slowing the rate of population ageing. This is evident in TFR data for 30 June 2021, with an increase to 1.8 compared with 1.72 for the previous 12 months. However, data also shows a decline in the number of marriages throughout the pandemic so far. Given that marriage usually precedes first births, it is reasonable to assume that there may be a delay to starting parenthood for many couples, which may or may not be recuperated at a later date. Unless, of course, COVID-19 also reverses this historical life event pattern so that the first child arrives prior to marriage!

In terms of deaths, the pandemic forced us to be more conscious of our health and its impact on others’ health. Stay at home orders, physical distancing, washing hands and sanitising regularly contributed to lowering the infections circulating our community, particularly influenza. This resulted in a decline in both the death rate and the number of deaths in the state, particularly in the older age groups. This also contributes to population growth due to increasing natural increase (births minus deaths), and, in turn, contributes to the rate of ageing of our population.

In terms of overseas migration, immigration to Tasmania all but ceased during the pandemic, except for Australians returning home. Emigration from Tasmania increased considerably throughout the pandemic, likely the result of the large number of temporary visa holders such as international students, skilled migrants and other temporary workers, returning to their home countries due to the lack of support provided to them by the Australian Government during the pandemic. The number of migrants leaving Tasmania far exceeded the number of Australians returning to Tasmania from overseas, resulting in an overall net decline in overseas migration for Tasmania to 30 June 2021 for the first time on record of 444 persons. Prior to the pandemic the considerable growth in net overseas migration for Tasmania, and the age profile of those migrants, contributed to both population growth and slowing the rate of population ageing. Even with the opening of borders to Australia, it is unlikely that Tasmania will experience the same level of overseas migration in the short to medium term.

Which brings us to interstate migration for Tasmania. Historically, interstate migration has been the component of population change with the greatest influence not only on whether the state’s population grows or declines, but also on its rate of population ageing due to the age profile of the interstate migrants arriving in or leaving Tasmania. Net interstate migration is the difference between arrivals to Tasmania and the departures from Tasmania. In the five years prior to the pandemic, around 13,500 people arrived in Tasmania while around 12,000 left on average each year, leaving an annual net gain of around 1,500 people.
​
For the year to June 2021, Tasmania recorded a net interstate migration gain of 49 persons. In that period, 13,735 people arrived to live in Tasmania and 13,686 people left to live interstate. While the number of people arriving in Tasmania increased considerably compared with the previous 12 months, the number of people leaving Tasmania to live elsewhere was the highest since 2004, a trend that began in 2015. 

As well as contributing to whether or not the population grows or declines, each of these six components of population change also contribute to the age profile of the Tasmanian population and whether or not our rate of ageing slows or increases. Regardless, given the mix of factors contributing to our growing population, it will also always be an ageing one.

Going forward as we continue to respond to the challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic presents us, it is difficult to predict what the impact on Tasmania's population growth will be, even with open borders. Critically, population change is much more complex than just interstate migrants knocking on our door. The decision to move interstate or overseas is a personal one, to or from Tasmania, and is influenced by a multitude of factors, as is whether or not to have a child (and how many to have). As we consider the future needs of our population, we need to appropriately plan for both opportunities and challenges in the context of all six components of population change.

NB this ABS data is for the period up to 30 June 2021, prior to the NSW, Victoria and ACT COVID-19 outbreaks and subsequent lockdowns, and prior to the comment made by the Premier.